Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions| Reviewers

Login 
  Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size Users Online: 176    
     
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 343-348

A prospective comparison of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging as a diagnostic tool for maxillofacial space infections


1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Narayana Dental College, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, India
2 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, CKS Theja Institute of Dental Sciences Research, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India
3 Department of Endodontics and Operative Dentistry, Narayana Dental College, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, India
4 Department of Prosthodontics, Narayana Dental College, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, India
5 Department of Prosthodontics, CKS Theja Institute of Dental Sciences Research, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Srikanth Ikkurthi
1-44, Plot No: 36-B, Jayanagar Colony, Near Bairagipatteda, Tirupati - 517 501, Andhra Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_315_17

Rights and Permissions

AimsandObjectives: The aim of this work was to assess the advantages and disadvantages of magnetic resonance imaging(MRI) versus computed tomography(CT) in the initial evaluation of maxillofacial space infections by comparing various parameters of the imaging studies and comparing them on a three-point scale. Materials and Methods: We prospectively evaluated 15patients with head and neck space infections. All patients underwent CT and MRI using similar slice thickness. We reviewed all imaging studies with special attention to location, extension, source of infection, extent of bone involvement, odontogenic or nonodontogenic, and presence of gas/calcium in the lesions. All the parameters were graded based on a three-point scale and were compared statistically by paired t-test. Results: According to the results we arrived at, MRI was superior to CT in regard to lesion conspicuity, extension, number of anatomic spaces involved, and source on infection. Although not significant, MRI detected a greater number of abscess collections. However, in the aspects of detection of intralesional gas and calcium and motion artifacts, CT was superior to MRI. However, these advantages of CT over MRI are not significantly better than those of MRI. Conclusion: MRI was considered superior to CT in the initial evaluation of head and neck space infections. Our study thus concludes that MRI may be used as the primary modality to evaluate patients with head and neck infections when clinically feasible.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed717    
    Printed14    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded84    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 2    

Recommend this journal